सवितर्क and निर्वितर्क are concerned with gross objects while सविचार and निर्विचार are concerned with subtle objects.

निर्विचारवैशारद्येऽध्यात्मप्रसादः॥४७॥ (Yoga Sutra 1.47)

“When निर्विचार is perfected, there follows the purity of the internal organ (mind)”

Though both सवितर्क and निर्वितर्क have gross objects as their content, the निर्वितर्क, which has the nature of being free from विकल्प, is still superior to सवितर्क, which is mixed up with विकल्प between word, meaning and ideation.

Superior to that is सविचार, which is concerned with subtle objects and in which they are revealed in assocition with विकल्प.

Superior even to that is निर्विचार, which is concerned with subtle objects and in which they are revealed unassociated with विकल्प.

Among them, the preceeding three, being meant to lead to the निर्विचार become fruitful by the fruitfulness of the निर्विचार itself.

However, when the निर्विचार समाधि becomes perfected through the power of intense practice, and the quality of सत्व unimpeded by रजस् and तमस्, becomes dominant, ‘there follows purity of the internal organ’; in that mind, which is devoid of the impressions of क्लेस (pain bearing obstructions), there arises the clear light of insight (प्रज्ञा) with regard to an object as it is in its totality, without any sequential comprehension.

On this Vyasa comments: “The sorrowless man of insight, after attaining the ‘clarity of insight’, looks upon all the sorrowful people as does a man on a mountain peak the people on the ground.”

‘There’, when the purity of the mind is gained, the insight (प्रज्ञा) that comes to the yogi whose mind is in the state of absorption is called ऋतम्भरा–that which contains truth only, in which there is not even a trace of error.

The term ऋतम्भरा is indeed a derivative term. And that निर्विचार समाधि is a high state of Yoga.

On this Vyasa states: “One attains the high state of Yoga by cultivating प्रज्ञा in three ways. Through scriptural texts (i.e. through श्रवण, अनुमान i.e. inference–मनन, and a liking for the practice of meditation known as निदिध्यासन.”

श्रुतानुमानप्रज्ञाभ्यामन्यविषया विशेषार्थत्वात्॥४९॥ (Yoga Sutra 1.49)

But that ऋतम्भरा प्रज्ञा is different from the knowledge gained through hearing (श्रुत) and inference (अनुमान), because it relates to specific characteristics of objects.

श्रुत means scriptural knowledge. That relates to objects in a general way only.

For, it is not possible to comprehend any relationship between a word and the specific characteristics of the object denoted by that word.

Similarly, inference relates to objects in a general way only; for it is not possible to understand the specific characteristics of an object through a knowledge of व्याप्ति (invariable concomitance).

For example, from the general knowledge that ‘fire exists wherever there is smoke’, one may infer that at a certain place ‘there is fire because smoke is also seen there’. But from this inference he will not know the particulars of that fire.

Therefore no specific characteristic can be an object of scriptural and inferential knowledge.

Besides, there is no direct knowledge of this subtle, hidden and remote entity through ordinary perception.

But that specific characteristic, be it of some subtle element or of the Person, does become clearly comprehended through insight gained in समाधि.

Therefore great effort has to be put in by a yogi for the ऋतम्भरा प्रज्ञा itself, insight that is filled with truth, which arises on the perfection of निर्विचार समाधि.

This निर्विचार समाधि is different from the knowledge gained from scriptural text and inference; and whose contents are all the specific characteristics, be they subtle, hidden and remote. This is the idea.

“By this much itself stands explained the सविचार and the निर्विचार समाधि which pertain to subtle objects.”

That समाधि which has for its object the subtle, uncompounded elements etc. is of two kinds–सविचार and निर्विचार.

These two kinds are according to the difference of their being with or without विकल्प.

विकल्प as already explained is the imaginary relationship between a word, its meaning, or object, and the corresponding ideation or mental impression.

These stand explained by this much itself, i.e. by सवितर्क and निर्वितर्क समाधि concerned with gross objects.

That is सविचार समाधि in which a subtle object becomes revealed, together with विकल्प, and as conditioned by space, time, quality, etc.

That is निर्विचार समाधि in which subtle object stands revealed merely as a substratum, and unassociated with विकल्प and as conditioned by space, time, quality, etc.

By the specification that सविचार and निर्विचार समाधि are concerned with subtle objects, it stands explained ipso facto that the सवितर्क and निर्वितर्क समाधि they are concerned with gross objects.

सूक्ष्मविषयत्वं चालिङ्गपर्यवसानम्॥४५॥ (Yoga Sutra 1.45)

“The fact of having subtle objects as their content is inclusive of आलिङ्ग”.

It should be noted that what has been said about the सविचार and निर्विचार समाधि having subtle objects as their content extends up to the आलिङ्ग.

लिङ्ग means that by which anything is indicated, or which can be resolved into its cause, or source.

आलिङ्ग means that of which there is no cause, which cannot be resolved further into any other source, and which is not indicative of anything else.

Thereby सानन्द and सास्मित समाधि also, which concern the means of perception (ग्रहण ) and the perceiver (ग्रहित्र्), become included in the ग्राह्य समाधि itself.

That is to say ग्राह्य समाधि concerning the object of perception. This is the idea.

There are seven प्रकृति or sources. They are the five monads of smell, taste, light, touch and sound and अहंकार and महत्.

So has it been said: The earth-atom has for its subtle source the smell-monad;

of the water-atom also the subtle source is the taste-monad;

of the fire-atom, the subtle source is light-monad;

of the air-atom, the subtle source is touch-monad;

of the space-atom, the subtle source is sound-monad.

For all of the above the subtle source is the principle called अहंकार or egoism;

Of this अहंकार the subtle source is mere लिङ्ग;

Of this लिङ्ग the subtle source is महत् the Cosmic Intelligence;

Of even that महत् the subtle source आलिङ्ग or प्रधान.

And the subtlety of all the seven प्रकृति, the sources, culminate in the प्रधान itself.

Therefore it has been said, ‘the fact of having subtle objects as their content’ extend up to that प्रधान alone.

Then there is the पुरुष (Person) who is more subtle than प्रधान, still, but He is not the material cause (अन्वयी-कारण).

Therefore it has been explained that the utmost subtlety belongs to प्रधान alone which is the material cause of all things.

On the other hand, although the पुरुष exists as the efficient cause, He is still not fit to be called their subtle cause, because he is not the material cause.

However, if what is under consideration be not the fact of being the material cause, i.e. if the intention be not to state that subtlety belongs only to what is the material cause, then it should be noted that even the पुरुष is indeed subtle.

ता एव सबीज: समाधिः॥४६॥ (Yoga Sutra 1.46)

“These alone are the समाधि concerned with objects.

These four समाधि are called सबीज-समाधि since they occur in association with the बीज, literally seed i.e. object of perception.”

As stated before संप्रज्ञात-समाधि is a kind of meditation (भावना) through which the nature of objects of meditation is known clearly.

समाधि is reached with the help of वितर्क, विचार, आनन्द and अस्मिता and these are explained now.

It has already been pointed out that the objects are of two kinds, gross and subtle. They are part of प्रकृति, nature.

When meditation is undertaken on gross objects viz. the sixteen transformation of प्रकृति, nature consisting of 5 महाभूत (space, air, fire, water and earth) and eleven organs consisting of 5 ज्ञानेन्द्रिय and 5 कर्मेन्द्रिय plus the mind, along with the order of their succession and remembrance of their indicative words and their meaning, then come सवितर्क-समाधि .

In explaining this what is known as समाधि here means “accompanied with reason or thought”.

So when you concentrate and meditate on the gross objects, on their nature and in relation to time and space, it is वितर्क समाधि.

वितर्क समाधि is समाधि with argumentation. It is Sthula Dhyana.

Let’s take the ‘cat’ as a word, the ‘cat’ as an object and the ‘cat’ as an idea, though different from one another, are cognised as indistinct.

You begin to analyse the word ‘cat’. The characteristics of the word are different; the characteristics of the idea are different; and the characteristics of the object are also different.

Everything has a name which has some meaning.

When the mind apprehends a word and meditates on its meaning and form as well as on the understanding of both, and thus lose itself in the thing completely, it is called सवितर्क समाधि .

That is when the mind coaleses with the object knowledge dawns resulting in perception or cognition of the object.

The mixture of these three, sound of the word, its meaning and its knowledge of what it is, constitute perception or cognition of an object.

It is सवितर्क समाधि .

When meditation proceeds with regard to these themselves, without considering the order of their succession (of word, meaning and knowledge) and without remembering their indicative words and their meaning, then comes निर्वितर्क समाधि.

Both these are referred as वितर्क in the above Sutra of Patanjali.

When meditation proceeds with regard to subtle objects, consisting of the subtle elements as also the mind, as conditioned by time, space and quality, then it is सविचार समाधि.

सविचार समाधि is a meditation on the subtle Tanmatras (5 महाभूत of space, air, fire, water and earth), on their nature and in relation to time and space. This is Sukshma Dhyana. सविचार समाधि is Sukshma Dhyana.

When the meditation proceeds with regard to these very objects as unconditioned by time, space and quality, and they are revealed only as objects, then it is निर्विचार समाधि.

Both are meant by the word विचार.

Vyaasa comments on this saying: “वितर्क is the mental realization of the true nature of objects; when this is with regard to subtle objects, it is विचार.

This is called ग्राह्य समापत्ति (objective samaadhi).

When the mind which we refer to as internal organ, which is a product of सत्त्व गुण with a trace of रजस् and तमस् , is meditated upon then since the power of consciousness takes secondary position and the सत्त्व गुण, which is the object of meditation and is full of joy and light, becomes predominant, there comes सानन्द समाधि.

Those whose endeavour remains confined to this very सानन्द समाधि and who do not see any other reality in the form of प्रधान (प्रकृति, nature) or पुरुष (Person), they are referred to by the word विदेह, because they are devoid of self-identification with the body.

This is ग्रहण समापत्ति (समाधि with regard to the means of perception).

After that, when meditation proceeds by taking as the object of meditation the सत्त्व गुण that is pure and is not overcome by any traces of रजस् and तमस् , then since as a resut of the सत्त्व गुण, the object of meditation, becoming secondary and the power of consciousness becoming dominant there remain one’s existence alone as a residue, it is called सास्मित समाधि.

And it should not be apprehended that अहंकार (egoism, awareness of one’s individuality) and अस्मिता are non-different; because अहंकार occurs where the internal organ, the mind, perceives objects along with the awareness of “I”, but that is अस्मिता which occurs when the idea of one’s mere existence flashes in the mind that has become merged in प्रकृति as a result of a reverse transformation through an inward movement.

Those who remain satisfied in this very सास्मित समाधि, they, being unable to realize the supreme Purusha, are said to be in प्रकृति लय (merged in प्रकृति) because their minds remain merged in प्रकृति.

This is known as ग्राहित्र् समापत्ति (समाधि in the perceiver), for it is concerned with the perceiver in the form of an awareness of mere self-existence (अस्मिता).

विवेकख्यातिरविप्लवा हानोपायः॥२६॥ (Yoga Sutra 2.26)

But in the case of those who engage in meditation after distinguishing the supreme Person (Purusha) (from Prakrti), although even their discriminative knowledge (विवेक क्याति) of the Purusha alone is a ग्राहित्र् समापत्ति (समाधि in the perceiver), yet it is not सास्मित-समाधि; because in it the अस्मिता (awareness of self-existence) is discarded through discrimination.

Concentrating the mind thus always, the yogi, whose mind is fully controlled, achieves the Peace that culminates in Liberation and the steadfastness in My true nature.

Let us see How this idea is supported in Patanjali’s Yoga Sutra while continuing with the explanation of the words of Geetha.

अभ्यासवैराग्याभ्यां तन्निरोधः॥१२॥ (Yoga Sutra 1.12)

युज्ञ्जान, cocentrating, making absorbed in समाधि through practice (अभ्यास) and detachment (वैराग्य); आत्मानं, the mind; एवं, thus, by means of aforesaid rules of staying in a solitary place, etc.; सदा, always; योगी, the yogi, the one engrossed in Yoga; नियत-मानसः, whose mind is controlled, fully restrained, as a result of intense practice, or the one whose distractions in the form of thoughts are under control;

becoming thus,अधिगच्छति, achieves; शान्तिं, Peace that is in the form of cessation of all thoughts, and the flow of which is steady; and निर्वाण-परमां, culminates in Liberation, which is of the nature of cessation of nescience together with its effects, as a result of the rise of direct experience of Reality, and मत्-समस्थाम्, steadfastness in the supreme Bliss which is My true nature.

But it is not that he attains the mundane yogic powers which are the fruits of समाधि (intense concentration) on objects other than the Self; for they are hinderances to the समाधि that is necessary for Liberaion.

And accordingly, after stating the results of the respective समाधि (intense concentration), the venerable Patanjali says: “These are obstacles to समाधि (Self-absorbtion), but they are powers in the worldly state.” and “The Yogi should not feel allured or flattered by the overtures of the स्थानि (celestial beings, gods) for fear of evil again.”

So Vasishtha narrates that Uddaalaka, even though coaxed by gods, did not feel allured thereby, nor did he feel flattered, and ignoring the gods, practiced निर्विकल्प-समाधि alone for warding off recrudescence of evil.

The kind of समाधि that has to be rejected by one seeking Liberation has been stated by Patanjali:

वितर्कविचारानन्दास्मितारूपानुगमात्सम्प्रज्ञातः॥१७॥ Yoga Sutra 1.17) “When समाधि is reached with the help of वितर्क, विचार, आनन्द and अस्मिता it is called संप्रज्ञात-समाधि.

संप्रज्ञात-समाधि is a kind of meditation (भावना) through which the nature of objects of meditation is known clearly, specifically (प्र-ज्ञायते), in its totality (सम्यक्) as devoid of doubt, misapprehension and uncertainty.

Meditation (भावना), verily, is fixing repeately in the mind the objects thought of, to the exclusion of other objects.

And the object of meditation is of three kinds according to its difference as ‘an object of perception, ग्राह्य’, the means of perception, ग्रहण or the perceiver, ग्रहीत्र्’.

The object of meditation too is of two kinds, according to its difference as gross or subtle.

So Patanjali says: “When the thoughts are weakened, mind acquires fixity in and identity with the perceiver, the means of perception or the object of perception as does a transparent crystal. This is called समापत्ति (absorption)”.

Of the mind in which the thoughts born of rajas and tamas have become weakened, there comes about ‘fixity in’ and ‘identity with’ those very perceiver, the means of perception and the perceived, (i.e.) the self, the organ of perception and the object (of perception).

That is to say, in the mind that has become subdued in which rajas and tamas have been completely suppressed, there follows prominence of the object of thought alone; there occurs that kind of absorption (समापत्ति), a transformation similar to that object of thought.

Just as a transparent crystal acquires various forms owing to its proximity with respective things, similarly a pure mind takes on the respective forms of the various objects of thoughts as a result of being colored by them.

This is called समापत्ति or समाधि, and these two terms are synonymous.

Though the Sutra says: “…with the perceiver, the means of perception or the object of perception”, still, it should be understood in a different order according to the succession of the level of समाधि.

So it has to be understood as “…with the objects of perception, the means of perception or the perceiver”, because in the beginning comes समाधि in the form of absorption in the object of perception itself, then follows absorption in the means of perception, thereafter the absorption in the perceiver.